Is Modalism just ‘Inverse Trinitarianism’?

[Soapy]

Following reference from 'The Critical Meaning of the Bible'.
Are the 'Ten Words' of God spoken to Moses or are they human formulations?
Compare the two different forms of the Decalogue (Exod 20:1-17,
Deut 5:6-21).
Might be a god time to invite discussion with our Jewish friends here.
In rabbinic discussions how much was actually spoken by God and how much was phrased by Moses
was an issue. In Exodus Rabbah 28.3 on Exod 19:8, God is portrayed as thinking.

Gershom Scholem---Gershom Scholem (Hebrew: גֵרְשׁׂם שָׁלוֹם) (5 December 1897 – 21 February 1982), was a German-born Israeli philosopher and historian. Widely regarded as the founder of modern academic study of the Kabbalah, Scholem was appointed the first professor of Jewish mysticism at Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Gershom Scholem - Wikipedia com
Scholem comments: "With this daring statement that the actual revelation to Israel consisted only of the aleph, Rabbi Mendel transformed the revelation of Moses on Mount Sinai into a mystical revelation, pregnant with final meaning, but without specific meaning...It has to be translated into human language, and that is what Moses did. In this light every statement ....It has to be translated into human language, and that is what Moses did. In this light every statement on authority is grounded would become a human interpretation, however valid and exalted, of something that transcends it."

What?

What does all that mean?

Let’s just stick to the scriptures as it is written (but beware of mistranslations and additions. We cannot know where parts were extracted but it can be certain that there are! Trinitarians would not want incriminating evidence that Jesus is not God left in the scriptures!! I mean, like, even when Jesus absolutely denies being [equal] to God, Trinitarians say he WAS SAYING that he is [equal to] God!!)

 

[pearl]

Let’s just stick to the scriptures as it is written (but beware of mistranslations and additions.

So you oppose any sort of critical study when it comes to Scripture.

Trinitarians would not want incriminating evidence that Jesus is not God left in the scriptures!!

Not true. The Church makes no claim that a trinitarian formula is to be found in Scripture. There is no trinitarian formula or doctrine
of the Trinity to be found in the Creed. There is however, the three, God, Son and Spirit within both Scripture
and Creed. The one place in Scripture that refers to Jesus as God is John 1:1 and that most believe to have been an early
Christian hymn. In no NT passage is there precision about three 'divine' persons co-equal and distinct, and one divine nature.
The precise trinitarian dogma is not detectable in the literal sense of the NT. But in the NT there is expressed views about
the pre-existent divinity of Jesus and personal characteristics of the Spirit establishing development for later church teachers.

The Trinity is the perfect model of communion in love. (the Lover, the Beloved, and the Love between them.)
It is a model of how we are to live our lives in relation to others.

 

[Soapy]

So you oppose any sort of critical study when it comes to Scripture.



Not true. The Church makes no claim that a trinitarian formula is to be found in Scripture. There is no trinitarian formula or doctrine
of the Trinity to be found in the Creed. There is however, the three, God, Son and Spirit within both Scripture
and Creed. The one place in Scripture that refers to Jesus as God is John 1:1 and that most believe to have been an early
Christian hymn. In no NT passage is there precision about three 'divine' persons co-equal and distinct, and one divine nature.
The precise trinitarian dogma is not detectable in the literal sense of the NT. But in the NT there is expressed views about
the pre-existent divinity of Jesus and personal characteristics of the Spirit establishing development for later church teachers.

The Trinity is the perfect model of communion in love. (the Lover, the Beloved, and the Love between them.)
It is a model of how we are to live our lives in relation to others.

So you have fallen for the deceit that Satan desires for mankind; the lie that scriptures warns us about:

• “The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.” (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12)

I post this to warn you in the hope you will not be one who is trapped in the delusion.

 

[101G]

I believe you are in error. Jesus was not both on earth and in Heaven at the same time. It is God who was in both places, in Jesus and in Heaven.

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

you still don't believe the scriptures ... do U?

101G.

 

[Soapy]

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

you still don't believe the scriptures ... do U?

101G.

The word ‘God’ is twofold:

1. A Title for the ruling deity
2. A Superlative Adjective (meaning like ‘Most Mighty, Most Glorious, Greatest, etc.

For 1) it fits that there can be many such deities who are all called ‘God’. The Philistines, the Romans, the Greeks, the Egyptians… all had deities whom were entitled, ‘God(s)’

For 2) it fits that all things, taken to extremes of positiveness are expressed as ‘God(s). For instance:

• A Chess grandmaster is ‘GOD’ of his game (What is another word for ‘God’ in that statement?)
• A Judge in his courtroom is ‘God’ of that courtroom (What is another word for ‘God’ in that statement?)
• An Athlete who is a consistent winner is ‘God’ of his sport (What is another word for ‘God’ in that statement?)

So, in John 1:1 the different terms are seen together: The [worshipped deity] of the Jews spoke [An almighty] word that created all things: ‘Let there be ….’

That is how, without contention, without contradiction, without confusion, it can be said that:

• ‘The word [of the deity of the jews] WAS AN ALMIGHTY WORD’
• ‘The word [of GOD] WAS [God]

Afterall, would you not say that an utterance that resulted in the creation of an unknown thing of such wondrous proportions was an ALMIGHTY WORD?…

Out of a spirit world came a physical world with properties that work together incredibly well.

 

[101G]

The word ‘God’ is twofold:

1. A Title for the ruling deity
2. A Superlative Adjective (meaning like ‘Most Mighty, Most Glorious, Greatest, etc.

so do God mean "FIRST" as in a designation? yes or no.

101G.

 

[Soapy]

so do God mean "FIRST" as in a designation? yes or no.

101G.

No, the term, ‘God’, does not mean ‘First’. There is no other who is ‘God’, therefore there can be no second ‘God’. The designation does not apply - ‘First’ implies there is a second, another, and others.

If you are referring to the descriptive title, ‘First and Last’, do you recognise that this means ‘Only [one]’? In this case I t is an emphatic declaration that there is no other ‘God’.

‘God’, in relativity, means ‘The GREATEST’, ‘Mightiest’, ‘Most Glorious’… There cannot be a ‘First Greatest’ or ‘second greatest’, ‘First Mightiest’ or second mightiest’… see the end letters ‘…est’, it indicates that there are ‘no others’, hence there can be no ‘first’:

• ‘Which ocean is the most deepest’? Can there be a second ‘most deepest’ ocean?

Can You give me a sentence or example of ‘God’ meaning ‘First’.

 

[wellwisher]

I hear about many claims about how the God of the Bible (YHWH) is supposed to be ‘Three persons as one God’, and also about the Man, Jesus, being ‘Three MODES of the One God’.

But neither of these definitions (albeit I didn’t define them precisely - I’ll leave that to you!) make any sense at all to me - except if I were watching a low grade ‘B’-Movie.

I’ve heard a lot about trinitarianism but Modalism is rarely discussed. Can anyone provide their view of modalism and how it contrasts (or not) with trinitarianism - please, with the emphasis on Modalism as the primary ideology.

The easiest way to understand the trinity or modalism is with a simple analogy. There is a man name Joe who is a father to his children, a husband to his wife and a son to his parents. Joe is one person with three different family modes, for the unique needs of three different audiences. He is intimate with his wife in unique ways he is not with his parents or children. Joe is firm but fair with his children in ways he is not with his parents or wife, and he is submissive and respectful to his parents, in a way he is not with his wife or children.

The trinity reflects the three ways to worship the same God. The Old Testament was about God the Father, the New Testament was about God the son and the Future testament, which is not yet compiled, is about God the Holy Spirit; intimate marriage to God via the spirit of truth. All three ways to worship God still exist and are a trinity of modes to relate to the same one God, either separately or in various combinations. The Trinity anticipates a Third Testament that has not yet been compiled; stories of the Saints who were intimate with God. They were also versed in God the Father and Son; Bible.

The trinity of ways to worship the same God is part of why Christianity became successful. These three ways are connected to the timeless interactions and right of passage of the family; archetypes.

When the three generations of this extended family of God come together during holidays, there are three generations in the same house. The interactions can often overlap and blur as the grandparents tells stories to their grand children of their Father, when he was a child; little Joey. The Father was not always a Father to children, but he was once a son. Time to God is not linear, but simultaneous; time can be detached from space-time.

 

[Soapy]

The easiest way to understand the trinity or modalism is with a simple analogy. There is a man name Joe who is a father to his children, a husband to his wife and a son to his parents. Joe is one person with three different family modes, for the unique needs of three different audiences. He is intimate with his wife in unique ways he is not with his parents or children. Joe is firm but fair with his children in ways he is not with his parents or wife, and he is submissive and respectful to his parents, in a way he is not with his wife or children.

The trinity reflects the three ways to worship the same God. The Old Testament was about God the Father, the New Testament was about God the son and the Future testament, which is not yet compiled, is about God the Holy Spirit; intimate marriage to God via the spirit of truth. All three ways to worship God still exist and are a trinity of modes to relate to the same one God, either separately or in various combinations. The Trinity anticipates a Third Testament that has not yet been compiled; stories of the Saints who were intimate with God. They were also versed in God the Father and Son; Bible.

The trinity of ways to worship the same God is part of why Christianity became successful. These three ways are connected to the timeless interactions and right of passage of the family; archetypes.

When the three generations of this extended family of God come together during holidays, there are three generations in the same house. The interactions can often overlap and blur as the grandparents tells stories to their grand children of their Father, when he was a child; little Joey. The Father was not always a Father to children, but he was once a son. Time to God is not linear, but simultaneous; time can be detached from space-time.

Who is the Father of Joe (Analogy: God)?

And you are saying that there is a ‘God the Holy Spirit’ as well as the Spirit of Truth?

In my belief (and what the scriptures say), the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Truth. And that is why lying about the one true God is ‘Grieving the Spirit of God’ - which is what trinity does.

 

[Muffled]

I don’t think you know what you believe.

The spirit of God is not ‘DETACHABLE’ from God.

Your defiance of truth gets ever more desperate like you just showed.

See, hear: The Spirit of God is the WORD of God… it is the POWER of God. A persons WORD cannot be DETACHED from them - unless that person seeks to deny the word they uttered.

God never denies His word. God’s spirit is a HOLY SPIRIT… how can you suggest that God could not be detached from His Spirit as if someone was suggesting that it could … that double talk in the way many Trinitarians work: deny something that wasn’t said as if accusing the opponent of a deniable claim.

I believe you got the first three words right. I know what I believe.

I believe I speak the truth as I showed.

I believe John said so but he is only half right. The word is a manifestation of God just as creation is.

I believe that is false. The power of God is not a separate entity. It is a character of God so the power is a character of the Spirit just as the word is a character of God.

I believe that is illogical. The whole concept of word is that of communication.

I believe that would never happen with God and when I say detached I do not mean disassociated which is what you seem to have construed.

I believe in affect you have said that and that is not double talk; it is plain understanding of what you are saying which at times appears you don't even understand what you have said.

 

[Muffled]

Isn't that what one refers to as the 'inspired' word of God, with the actual 'word' being human?

I believe so although I don't know how much humanity can be ascribed to Spirit although having sojourned in a body God may come closer to it.

 

[Muffled]

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

you still don't believe the scriptures ... do U?

101G.

I believe the scriptures including the phrase "the word became flesh" but I certainly understand them better.

 

[Soapy]

I believe you got the first three words right. I know what I believe.

I believe I speak the truth as I showed.

I believe John said so but he is only half right. The word is a manifestation of God just as creation is.

I believe that is false. The power of God is not a separate entity. It is a character of God so the power is a character of the Spirit just as the word is a character of God.

I believe that is illogical. The whole concept of word is that of communication.

I believe that would never happen with God and when I say detached I do not mean disassociated which is what you seem to have construed.

I believe in affect you have said that and that is not double talk; it is plain understanding of what you are saying which at times appears you don't even understand what you have said.

I still think you know not what you are saying.

Does all that actually make sense to you?
Really??

 

[Soapy]

I believe the scriptures including the phrase "the word became flesh" but I certainly understand them better.

‘The word made flesh’ is exactly what it says:
God spoke [a word: ‘Let there be light’] and that word came to fruition in the creation of the universe - a big bang - an explosion of light.

God spoke a word that he would send a saviour… in the fullness of time that word came to fruition: A saviour was born and sent on a mission of salvation.

Every word spoken from the mouth of God only returns to him after it has fulfilled the purpose to which it was uttered…

How many ‘words’ are there that God spoke?
Have they not, so far, all come in the flesh as of word pertaining to the present times?

 

[101G]

I believe the scriptures including the phrase "the word became flesh" but I certainly understand them better.

ok you believe the Scriptures .... Good. so how did God become Flesh? remember by the scriptures.

101G

 

[Starlight]

I’m glad you stated ‘In the trinity doctrine’.

But once again you state God as a BEING (Sentient or Object?) who is SHARED by three BEINGS (clearly Sentient).

And you think that makes sense?

So if the three share the one, how is it the three are DIFFERENT in every way from each other and also perform different functions from each other?

Test: Three Fish (trinity three) share a bowl of water (God)… ok, a bowl of water isn’t sentient!! but it serves as SHAREABLE among the three fish…
Question: Does the water cause each fish to be different from each other and serve different purposes in the water?
———————————————
So what about this verses?

The reason you ask is because you DO KNOW what they mean. They show that Jesus is provided with things BY THE FATHER. So Jesus is not the source of his power but is granted such. And his Will is to do the Will of the Father.

The verse quoted shows where Jesus subdues his own Will and places the Father’s Will ahead of his own. In the specific case, Jesus’ Will was to desire that the upcoming cruel punishment and death he was to suffer the next day be ‘taken away’ and that the salvation of mankind to be achieved in a different way…. But Jesus caught himself immediately and put the Will of God before his own and allowed himself to be subjected to his fate.

And most Christian’s “travel the road that leads to destruction”, as a saying!

What is being claimed by Trinitarians is that Jesus is schizophrenic or is dual personality, ‘DID’ (Dissociative Identity Disorder)…
One moment, trinity says, he is Almighty God who knows all things and can do all things, is immortal, and faultless. The next moment he is man with all the failings of every human being except sinning.

How is this achieved? In any situation, how does Jesus decide which personality he should be? For instance, when asked when he is coming back he says he does not know because only God knows … but trinity says he IS GOD?

On another occasion he fails to fully heal first time two men afflicted by blindness!! Yet God made Moses’ hand leprous and then not leprous in a moment after talking with Moses. Jesus, in contrasts, performs miracles AFTER FIRST PRAYING TO GOD (for permission / for the spirit of God)!

It is the spirit of God that enables the act to be performed. God doesn’t ask for permission. Jesus does! Who’s spirit is it??

The trinity doctrine is not three beings who is one being,
The trinity is three persons who is one being

I understand you dislike the trinity. I also dislike the trinity. It create confusion

 

[Soapy]

The trinity doctrine is not three beings who is one being,
The trinity is three persons who is one being

So you are saying that God is not a Person.
Is that right?

I understand you dislike the trinity. I also dislike the trinity. It create confusion

Should truth like untruth?

Is it just confusion that makes you dislike trinity?

 

[Starlight]

So you are saying that God is not a Person.
Is that right?


Should truth like untruth?

Is it just confusion that makes you dislike trinity?

According to most christians God is three persons in one being

According to me God is only one person

No I also dislike the trinity since I believe the trinity is false. God is only one. God is not three and one at the same time.

 

[Soapy]

According to most christians God is three persons in one being

According to me God is only one person

No I also dislike the trinity since I believe the trinity is false. God is only one. God is not three and one at the same time.

Brilliant. You are one of the few here in this forum

The ‘Three Persons in one Being’ makes God an ‘It’…. A Thing… like a corporation; a business; a committee of such…! They ALSO SAY that God is ‘ESSENCE’ in which the three Persons share - which is why they are all co-equal : like three FISH in a bowl sharing the same WATER… God is the bowl and the water is the ESSENCE, and the three fish are co-equal swimmers; drinkers; space occupiers… of the water/essence.

Yes, Trinitarians have tried many analogies but none are valid. The Shamrock (three leaf clover) has a fourth item - a STEM - as well as joined three leaves!! Strange that Trinitarians haven’t noticed that?? The egg analogy… there are more than three parts to an egg -!! Ice, water, steam: Not all at the same time, though……


But don’t say, ‘According to me’!
Say, ‘According to Scriptures’.

Yes, I do realise most forums are trinity believing and it’s brave to come out and declare against it but believe me, it’s the right thing to do!

Let those who can’t stand to hear the truth go post in a Catholic-Only forum where everyone agrees with each other’s wrongness!

 

[Muffled]

I still think you know not what you are saying.

Does all that actually make sense to you?
Really??

I believe it does.